On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 1:59 AM, Michael Bruck <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Zach Welch <[email protected]> wrote:
>> At the most fundamental level, it comes down to this: >> >> C == imperative programming >> C++ == object-oriented programming >> >> The different mindsets should yield completely different code. Their >> overall architectures could be virtually identical, but the code would >> not be structured even remotely the same. > > The current code looks to me as if in large parts it is a simulation > of C++ in C. Linux itself is highly object-oriented, and it hasn't been C++ since 1992 at least. (oo abstraction examples: vfs, block device, network protocol, scsi device, cd device, etc.) It has excellent style. It's highly readable as kernels go. If there is any question of changing style, follow Linux. _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
